1. Field of the Invention
This invention pertains generally to finite pool bonus awards. More particularly, the invention relates to a method and system for providing simulated bonus awards in a finite pool award arrangement.
2. The Prior Art
Finite pool award systems are known in the field of gaming and lottery. Unlike random-based games such as slot machines, for example, wherein the outcome of the game is based primarily on random events, finite pool awards (or fixed-pool awards) are based primarily on a draw from a finite distribution of outcomes or results.
Common forms of finite pool games include pull-tab and scratch-off lottery tickets. These tickets are arranged into finite sets called “deals,” “decks” or “draws”. Each finite set has a predetermined number of tickets at various prize levels. Therefore the total price of the deck is known (since the tickets are sold for a uniform amount) and the total value of the prizes is known, so the seller of the tickets knows the total profit to be made on the sale of the deck. These decks of tickets are manufactured and printed at a central location, and put into a form usable by standard dispensing machines, typically in rolls or stacks. These rolls are then physically distributed from the central location to each vending site for dispensing. Tickets are dispensed by clerks or vending machines to customers, who peel open a layer hiding the prize contents to reveal what their winning value is, if any. Winning tickets are redeemable for the value of the win. Examples of such implementations are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,290,033 entitled “GAMING MACHINE AND COUPONS” to Bittner, et al. and 5,348,299 entitled “ELECTRONIC GAMING APPARATUS” to Clapper, Jr.
In addition to the paper version of pull-tab games described above, electronic versions of pull-tab games have also been implemented. Under this electronic arrangement, the finite sets (“decks”) are generated electronically and stored on a central server. One or more player terminals are then networked to the central server. Players, who wish to play a pull-tab game under this arrangement, may purchase, reveal, and redeem the electronic pull-tabs from the player terminals. When a player at a player terminal makes a purchase, an electronic pull-tab or “game element” is communicated from the server to the player terminal. The electronic pull-tab is displayed to the player on the player terminal and is removed from the “deck” by the central server to indicate that the pull-tab has been played. The presentation of the pull-tab to the player may be provided in various forms (such as poker hands, slot symbols, keno symbols, etc.) to mimic the presentation of other games of chance (e.g., random-based games, such as video poker, slot machines, video keno, etc.) although in reality the game is that of a finite pool award, namely pull-tab games.
Various arrangements have been further developed to further increase player participation in electronic forms of finite pool award games. One such technique is generally referred to as “reverse-mapping” and is described in copending U.S. Application “Lottery System Having Reverse-Mapped Game Set” Ser. No. 09/450,821, the disclosure of which is expressly incorporated herein by reference in entirety. Unlike prior art lottery systems which provide both the outcome symbols and the win amount to the player terminal for each pull-tab game drawn from the central server, the reverse-mapping method only provides the win amount; the player terminal, after receiving the win amount, is then able to generate the outcome symbols from the win amount; the outcome symbols are then presented to the player. This arrangement provides the advantage of allowing the player terminals to generate one of a plurality of game outcomes symbols to the player, thereby increasing game diversity and player appeal. This arrangement also allows different game formats on player terminals to share the same finite prize pool maintained on a single server.
Another disadvantage of systems of the prior art results from legal restrictions on “bonus” awards. Some jurisdictions effectively limit the use of bonus or secondary event awards, by requiring that such awards not be counted in determining the net payout of a gaming device. These rules tend to limit the flexibility available to the designer of a game. The reverse-mapped system of copending U.S. Application entitled “Lottery System Having Reverse-Mapped Game Set” Ser. No. 09/450,821 describes an approach with provides more flexibility, and can be more easily tailored to comply with local regulations while still providing a varied and entertaining game, through the use of bonus and secondary event simulations that are reverse-mapped from pre-determined award outcomes. The payouts to the player are not true “bonus” awards but only simulated bonus awards using a single draw for the finite pool. Under this arrangement, the central server provides pre-determined award outcomes (game elements) which may indicate that a portion of the award is to be paid as a “bonus” simulation. If the selected game set element is coded or is otherwise determined to be applied as a bonus award, a portion of the winnings may be paid to the player in the form of a bonus award, rather than as part of the primary base pay. Each portion (base pay and secondary pay) can then be reversed-mapped by the player terminal to provide a symbolic display for each pay (e.g., a slot display for the base pay and a secondary game screen for the secondary pay). For example, a predetermined award amount of $1000 can be paid to the player either through a base pay of $1000 (no bonus pay) or a base pay of $100 plus a secondary bonus pay of $900.
Unfortunately, as games of chance (e.g., slot machines) have become more complex including numerous payline arrangements and multiple bonus levels, the number of possible win combinations (base pay+bonus win) has likewise grown. Simulating these complex games on a finite pool award system becomes unpractical (e.g., memory, processor, and other limitations) due to the increased number of win combinations that need to be represented in a finite pool. With the limited memory and processing power of the lottery player terminals, complex paylines and bonus levels could not be practically represented using the reverse-mapping technique described above.